As I said, UK - Moore should have been fined & kicked out, and that stuff is unacceptable... even as a response to a dirty play. But the context is important, and we'll just have to disagree on the "who is dirtier" question.

What I don't get about your point of view is, if I sucker punched you, and then you did something even more aggressive (what you might call dirtier?) back as a response... do you really think that makes you dirtier overall? ... I'm not sure I agree with you on that. You're ignoring the entire concept of "instigation", and saying that no matter how dirty your guy is, the other player can't overrespond or you'll claim the other player is dirtier. Doesn't make sense at all.

MWill ... respect to you, sir. I do believe that was not only a really physical, tough game - but very poorly officiated.

I don't ignore the fact it was retaliation to a dirty act. I just don't think it excuses it.

And I think there's a big difference between getting a football move wrong, and just plain going after someone after the whistle. The former can be a simple accident - in my rugby playing 'career' (very low level) I;ve never once tried to do something I've known was illegal, but I;ve been penalised more than a few times because I misjudge stuff often. Incompetence rather than malice.

And to be clear, although I think Moore made the dirtiest play of the game, I do not think the Bears were the dirtier team in that game. I think it was pretty even on that score. The whole point I was trying to make was not that the Bears are a dirty team (I don't think they are at all) but just to point out that the clearest foul in the game hardly got a mention in the national media (other than to rip on the Lions some more for Stafford's part in creating it) whereas any misstep from the Lions got mentioned plenty.

Now perhaps we deserve that extra scrutiny, given the Lions' play so far this season. But I do think it is fair to say the media is judging the Lions by a slightly harsher standard than they judge other teams - which means that the Lions reputation, whilst in large part deserved, is also part exagerated IMO.

November 21st, 2011, 6:20 pm

m2karateman

RIP Killer

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pmPosts: 10066Location: Where ever I'm at now

Re: GAME DAY THREAD: Lions vs. Bears II

I.E. wrote:

What I don't get about your point of view is, if I sucker punched you, and then you did something even more aggressive (what you might call dirtier?) back as a response... do you really think that makes you dirtier overall? ... I'm not sure I agree with you on that. You're ignoring the entire concept of "instigation", and saying that no matter how dirty your guy is, the other player can't overrespond or you'll claim the other player is dirtier. Doesn't make sense at all.

But it's OK that Moore was essentially facemasking Stafford during that block? You keep implying that Stafford was the instigator. Sorry, but you got that all wrong. Moore had his hands on Matt's facemask and kept it there prior to Stafford throwing him. So...if you wanna play that card, I think you just got trumped.

And to UK's point, what happens between the whistles can be considered incidental. It may not be, but typically the league is more tolerable of that. Not the after the whistle stuff...that is just plain garbage.

Look what happened with Dashon Goldson yesterday. The guy he punched was hitting him in the head during the play. Who was dirtier? The league says Goldson, because he went after him after the whistle.

Sorry, but cut it any way you want....Moore deliberately went after a guy who was on the ground, after the whistle, and a "soft" target at that (QB). He doesn't even consider doing that if it was somebody else.

_________________I will not put on blinders when it comes to our QBs performances.

November 21st, 2011, 8:30 pm

I.E.

Walk On

Joined: September 11th, 2010, 10:19 pmPosts: 408

Re: GAME DAY THREAD: Lions vs. Bears II

m2karateman wrote:

But it's OK that Moore was essentially facemasking Stafford during that block? You keep implying that Stafford was the instigator. Sorry, but you got that all wrong. Moore had his hands on Matt's facemask and kept it there prior to Stafford throwing him. So...if you wanna play that card, I think you just got trumped.

Trumped? I don't think so ... you're the first that mentioned it. I'll go back & watch (again).

m2karateman wrote:

And to UK's point, what happens between the whistles can be considered incidental. It may not be, but typically the league is more tolerable of that. Not the after the whistle stuff...that is just plain garbage.

A dirty act is a dirty act whether the whistle has blown or not.

m2karateman wrote:

Sorry, but cut it any way you want....Moore deliberately went after a guy who was on the ground, after the whistle, and a "soft" target at that (QB). He doesn't even consider doing that if it was somebody else.

Have I argued that Moore's action was OK in any way? No.

The soft target thing is irrelevant. And so is the speculation about when he would and would not have done something.

Why so sensitive about this? The Raiders, Steelers or Ravens never apologized or tried to explain away who they were.

November 22nd, 2011, 10:55 am

Footsoldier32

Mr. Irrelevant

Joined: February 28th, 2007, 12:13 pmPosts: 975

Re: GAME DAY THREAD: Lions vs. Bears II

I.E. wrote:

The Raiders, Steelers or Ravens never apologized or tried to explain away who they were.

Neither have the lions. The fans do that work for them.

_________________If you think education is tough, try being stoopid.

November 22nd, 2011, 4:19 pm

TheRealWags

Modmin Dude

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 amPosts: 12296

Re: GAME DAY THREAD: Lions vs. Bears II

ESPN wrote:

Brian Urlacher respects Jim SchwartzEven as speculation swirled Monday about possible fines or suspensions arising from Sunday's chippy win over the Detroit Lions, Chicago Bears linebacker Brian Urlacher found time Monday to pay respect to the Lions and their coach.

It was somewhat surprising considering the fight and unnecessary roughness penalties that punctuated the Bears' 37-13 win at Soldier Field. But Urlacher, appearing on "The Waddle & Silvy Show" on ESPN 1000, refused to label the Lions as a "dirty" team.

"They play to the echo of the whistle," Urlacher said. "As a player, you can't be mad because that's the way the game should be played. They play fast. They play physical. Sometimes they go a little bit too far, but you know what, sometimes they get away with it.

"That's just the way the game is played now, I guess."

Lions coach Jim Schwartz grew irritated Sunday when asked if he needed to discipline his players for personal fouls and unnecessary roughness.

An NFL spokesman told ESPNChicago.com on Monday that the league will review the fight that occurred in the fourth quarter.

"I like their head coach," Urlacher said. "I"ll tell you that much. I think he's doing a good job for that organization.

"He's a hard-nosed guy. That's how he wants his guys to play. I can't be mad at him."

Urlacher wrote:

“You know what? They play to the echo of the whistle," he said, via Sports Radio Interviews. "As a player you can’t be mad because that is the way the game should be played. They play fast and they play physical and sometimes they go a little bit too far, but you know what? Sometimes you get away with it. …

"I like their head coach. I will tell you that much. I think he has done a good job for that organization and he’s a hard-nosed guy. He wants his guys to play, so I can’t be mad at him, but you don’t like it when you are playing against them because it pisses you off, but you know what they do a good job and they play hard.”